Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

I have a suggestion, dont know whether its feasible or not, however posting it 🙂

For all the samskrutha shlokas you have posted the english transliteration, would it be possible
to put the shlokas in devanagri itself or in kannada ? that would make reading all the shlokas a bit easy

I think the devanagari scripts of the shlokas can be obtained by using the software baraha, by putting
in the english transliteration, and almost all the modern browsers do support showing of the devanagari script on the browser.

Thanks for the encouragement. Devanagiri and Kannada versions of Sri Hari Vayu Stuti are freely available on the internet, I’ll definitely try to incorporate them into this site. Once I’ve completed all the shlokas after one round, I’ll look into providing Devangiri scripts of all the reference shlokas.

I’ve added this to the updates section, the first priority is to complete the commentaries for all shlokas.

Below is the discussion I’m talking about
Quote
It is not recorded in any of the Vyasa Tirtha’s works. ISKCON ancestor Baladeva Vidyabhushana recorded this in his work saying that Vyasa Tirtha composed it – but that t…oo is not right. Baladeva’s summarization is slightly different from Sri Vyasatirtha’s and also ascribes it to Srimad Acharya (not Sri Vyasatirtha). The other reasons for rejecting this as Sri Vyasatirtha’s work – such as it is not recorded in other works, or it does not mention Vayu Jivottamatva – are very trivial ones. This is an independent verse of Sri VT, need not find mention in other works. I remember reading that Sri Vidyamanyaru defending the position that verse is an authentic verse from Sri Vyasatirtharu, using the first phrase ‘hariH partaraH’ to justify Vayu-jIvottamatva. I don’t remember how exactly he did that, but if you read Prameya Dipika on Gita ‘mattaH parataraH’, it points out that the Lord is saying that there is nothing among the superiors, who is supreme to Him. By the word ‘hari’ it refers to both Hari and Vayu. dehali deepa nyaaya in a way. So I go with the tradition that this verse is composed by Sri Vyasatirtha eva.
UnQuote

Quote
[quote] Baladeva’s summarization is slightly different from Sri Vyasatirtha’s and also ascribes it to Srimad Acharya (not Sri Vyasatirtha). [unquote]

No sir. Baladeva paraphrases Vyasatirtha although in the beginning of th…e shloka it says, “madhvaH prAha”.

[quote] The other reasons for rejecting this as Sri Vyasatirtha’s work – such as it is not recorded in other works, or it does not mention Vayu Jivottamatva – are very trivial ones. [unquote]

No they are not. At least other yatis should have used it as a standard if Shri Vyasatirtha himself composed it. Agreed or not? This is not trivial.

[quote] So I go with the tradition that this verse is composed by Sri Vyasatirtha eva. [unquote]

You are free to hold an opinion, but the fact remains…

(1) many important tenets of Madhva philosophy are not present there such as Vayu Jeevottamatva (when we are listing tenets what purpose shleshalankara serves?), jeeva traividhya, atma having permanent linga, clear and absolute distinction between God and soul.

(2) Except nIchOcchabhAvaMgatAH, other tenets are identical with some of the Ramanujiya tenets. So the very purpose of listing unique tenets of Madhva philosophy is defeated (if only 1 among 9 tenets are unique, and other unique tenets are not told).

(3) These nine tenets and the absence of other important tenets of Madhva philosophy in this shloka, has been misused by ISKCONaites to show that their school is connected to Madhva school, although they cannot at all accept the absolute difference between jeeva and brahma, jeeva traividhya and vaayu jeevottamatva.
Unquote

I will investigate on this further; if any of the readers have any thoughts on this… please share